5 years for ILR rule implemented

[SidB]

Well done Stephen and thank you for taking this up and more so for keeping us posted. Will be very grateful if you could keep us posted on any future developments on this forum.

[jayj]

Excellent work Stephen....hope we triumph in this...

[a11]

Hi Justice,

I wrote you a PM (in fact, two identical ones :)), but I'm not sure they got sent. Please let me know if you received them. If not, please PM me your email address and I'll respond there.

Thanks,
a11

[easylife4me]

is there any update on this.
please.....

[stevej]

What is now?

[a11]

The Minister said to Andrew Dismore MP today that he would look into the issue in mid-September. In itself, this delay does not mean that the response will be negative - however, this outcome of course cannot be ruled out.
In the meanwhile, we are asking everyone to continue raising public awareness and asking their MPs to support the campaign.
In parallel, VBSI will be working on a 'plan B' in case the lobbying approach fails.

[jayj]

Hi guys,

It's today that we recieve some info from Stephen with regards to the rule change , isnt it?

I hope its gonna change

[mansawant]

Hi all,

We are all waiting for some information from Mr. Stephen today (18th August 06). Hope he will update asap.

Thanks & Regards,
Mansawant

[jason_rency]

any update for the JR?

[jayj]

No news as yet!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stephen please give us a heads up on this even if you have no answer from JR, at least let us know there's no news...

[ismangil]

This is probably going to be a bit controversial, but maybe can foster debate as well.

Background: I am HSMP holder since 21 June 2002, therefore I was going to apply for ILTR after 3 yr 11 mo which is 21 May 2006. Yep, the change was 3 April, really hit me in the face. After calling Home Office confirming that I couldn't apply for ILTR they told me to apply ASAP for extension, which I did in April, and they came back in 8 working days, showing I was extended 3 yr to 2009. To be fair, very impressive turnaround time. Personally the change did not have any adverse effect on me. I already got a mortgage originally from Halifax which doesn't care about my limited visa. I have no university age children relying on home fees status. My employer and my spouse's employer also doesn't care. It is just a minor annoyance that I think I can claim CTC and Child benefit... but I've been without them for 4 years so what.

To the credit of vbsi.org.uk, after reading the site and finding that my MP hasn't been contacted I finally sent him a letter. VBSI made it easy with templates, links to House of Commons etc. This was my first 'democratic' act, as I have never ever had contacted any government whatsoever! The reply was also, to be fair again very comprehensive as apparently my MP has received a reply from an undersecretary.

The main point of the reply was that UK does not pass retrospective laws. The law became effective they day it was passed. Now this got me thinking. Really hard. How to relate this to the "petrol station" analogy used on vbsi.org.uk?

So I think I have to come up with a new analogy: personal loan vs variable rate mortgage. We think the 4 year rule was fixed as in personal loan interest rate which is usually fixed from the start for the term. Whereas the government thinks that they are providing variable rate mortgage where the rate can change monthly (like this month!). And I happen to think they may have a point.

And what about little rules like grad students starting May 2006 can stay for two year? Why don't they apply to current graduating students which start 1-3 yrs ago? Well, if you've seen Nationwide TV ads: "New customers only!"

We immigrants are exactly like personal finance customers: getting bad deals from large financial institutions! And unfortunately I can't go to Nationwide for better immigrant treatment!

In conclusion, for now, I am just going to wait for May 2007, assuming there is no further change, to apply for ILTR.

Good luck for those lobbying for change, through whatever means.
[Update: changed 'metaphor' to 'analogy']

[Chess]

Perry - that is an interesting analogy.....

[ismangil]

Perry - that is an interesting analogy.....

Thanks Chess, and you also reminded me that the phrase I was looking for was analogy rather than metaphor!

[sowhat]

I like the analogy as well!

[ismangil]

I like the analogy as well!

Now to continue the analogy:

So can we do anything about it? The answer is probably yes. Like in personal finance, things like endowment mis-selling, unfair bank charges etc have been successfully shown and can be claimed back. But it needs a FSA or OFT type office to do it, which regulates and sort of offer consumer protection. Which immigration policy doesn't have.

[sowhat]

I like the analogy as well!

Now to continue the analogy:

So can we do anything about it? The answer is probably yes. Like in personal finance, things like endowment mis-selling, unfair bank charges etc have been successfully shown and can be claimed back. But it needs a FSA or OFT type office to do it, which regulates and sort of offer consumer protection. Which immigration policy doesn't have.

The Parliament and the court are to oversee the public offices...

[ismangil]

The Parliament and the court are to oversee the public offices...

Somehow the notion of politicians acting in the best interest of immigrants doesn't give me much comfort

[wr]

Dear Friends,

I will update you on the Judicial Review proceedings by the end of this week.

Stephen Kong
(Partner)
for HARVEY SON & FILBY SOLICITORS

[tobiashomer]

No news is good news?? actually in my experience it is usually the contrary. But still, an update would be most welcome even if there is no news.

[jayj]

Hi Guys

No news as yet.................. hmm...doesn't look good....

[easylife4me]

any update pleaseeeeeee..

[WP_Holder_05_2002]

There is another recommendation which can hit skilled immigrants quite badly. There is an organisation Migration Watch who has present recomendations that ILR must be given to only those immigrants who are earning more than 27,000.00 pounds per annum and they believe anybody earning less than that is not contributing to the UK Economy.

We should work together.. things are getting quite serious.. There are loads and loads of new EU non-skilled immigrants are being allowed (we don't have any problem with them) but why we are being made scape goat. I REQUEST ALL THE READERS.. PLEASE BE UNITED AND BE AWAKE otherwise we will be keep suffering like this.. Any unjust law like this retrospective effect can come anytime and it seems very easy for Home Office to exploit the poor non-EU migrants.
If I knew this 4 years before, most probably, I wouldn't have stayed here that long.

[WP_Holder_05_2002]

I had read at this forum that In Europe, the work permit holders can apply for ILR after 5 years and if anyone has spent some time as student, 50% of such time is taken in account as well.

At the moment, I have spent 4 years as student and 4 syears as work permit holder.. can anyone advice please.

[rooi_ding]

The article you are referring to is the European directive on long stay people of third citizen countries, it is by far a more fair system then the UK one which is a 10 years of continues stay. I am in a similar situation as you, however I was on an AV dependant visa before switching to a WP so I have spent eight years working continuously paying taxes contributing 10.9% to the GDP check out this article on MSN money http://money.uk.msn.com/MyMoney/Insight ... tid=852679 . The UK will not recognize this long term stay until you hit the 10 year mark. This feels like the 1980's all over again (I am originally from SA), the UK is becoming an apartheid country the way the newspapers are reporting that immigrants are draining the country is also the same way that Hitler started his campaign against the Jews in the holocaust. I am not saying that we will all be shipped off to concentration camps, but they are defiantly making it increasing uncomfortable for immigrants to actually feel welcome.

The average person on the street who does not know an immigrant as either a friend or acquaintance will take what the tabloids say to heart because we all know that the British public tends to follow like sheep (IRAQ WAR) being a prime example. Now before the English people who read this forum jump up and down and because they think I am abusing them, generally the English people on this forum on sympathetic towards immigrants. I am talking about the uneducated masses who have know idea what real contribution immigrants make legal or illegal. Maybe we should all start thinking about going home or maybe moving to a developing nation to prop up there economy and dump the UK and all other developed countries that have an issue with immigrants.

There is now a debate on the MSN forum on immigrants we should all try contribute to it, an start to educate the English public.

[easylife4me]

'Migrants Must Earn Over £27,000'
30 August 2006

Long term immigration causes 'pressure on infrastructure'


A leading independent think-tank has condemned the government’s failed immigration polices, suggesting that only those immigrants earning over £27,000 a year should be given permanent residence in the UK.

Following the Home Secretary’s recent suggestions for optimum limits on migrants, Migrationwatch UK has called on government to allow long term economic migration only to those who are ‘highly skilled’. Responding to obvious concerns about the UK’s productivity and skills gap, the group have suggested that lower-skilled migrants could be used to fill British jobs temporarily while UK workers become fully trained.

Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migrationwatch and formerly with the Foreign Office as Director for the Middle East, said: “The Government and its supporters repeatedly trot out favourable looking statistics which seek to give the impression that immigration in general has a very positive effect on the UK economy”.

“The reality is that immigrants are extremely varied. A minority are highly skilled and highly paid but a large majority will end up as a cost to the taxpayer if they settle here permanently”, he continued.

Citing research produced by the government, Migrationwatch concur that for an employee to make a positive lifetime contribution to society, they must earn £27,000 a year, measured in either tax contributions or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Admittedly, this is the average salary for full time employment, a salary which only 20% of migrants can achieve.

According to a statement released yesterday, they note that migration is only beneficial over the long term if it raises overall productivity. Counter to this, migrants, they state, simply add to the pressure on infrastructure and public services.

“To most people the measures we are suggesting are simple common sense”, Sir Andrew added. “This research demonstrates once more that there is no economic case for massive immigration into the UK. The Home Secretary is right to say that we need to balance economic gain against social costs”.

“The social costs of the present massive levels of immigration, including their impact on infrastructure and public services, far outweigh any possible benefit”.

Vijay Pattni